islandhopper Posted April 20, 2007 Report Share Posted April 20, 2007 ... I'm afraid it will all end like this:http://www.eurotrib.com/story/2007/1/20/164151/463Although that was about playing with winds a couple of months ago and now our good guy is disturbing waters ... Much Ado About Nothing ... as good old Willie tought us ... [edit]The link to Shetland News on that page doen't work properly, but I guess all of you know the reference ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenheatman Posted April 20, 2007 Report Share Posted April 20, 2007 If there was someone who understood graphs, and they told you to go away, would you go away ? Yes, bring him or her on. Still waiting -where can you find anybody that understands graphs? Not holding my breath BTW! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostrider Posted April 20, 2007 Report Share Posted April 20, 2007 You're proposing to remove 102 Mwh energy continious from your thermal store(s), fed from one barge, yet only vary the temperature circa +/- 3 C. Does this barge feed only one of your 8 Ton/1800 Gallon stores, or multiples? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenheatman Posted April 20, 2007 Report Share Posted April 20, 2007 You're proposing to remove 102 Mwh energy continious from your thermal store(s), fed from one barge, yet only vary the temperature circa +/- 3 C. Does this barge feed only one of your 8 Ton/1800 Gallon stores, or multiples? No, I will need to remove around 165MWh(thermal) continuously from the store, daily, to generate at 102MWh(electrical) daily assuming a conservative 62% conversion efficiency. The barge feeds several 8000kg stores to keep the dT withing the +/- 3C range. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenheatman Posted April 20, 2007 Report Share Posted April 20, 2007 ... I'm afraid it will all end like this:http://www.eurotrib.com/story/2007/1/20/164151/463 I blame tertiary education. These comments are pathetic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenheatman Posted April 20, 2007 Report Share Posted April 20, 2007 What happened to our time-served engineer who has worked on gennies in the past? Is he lying in a darkened room now that he actually 'gets it'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
islandhopper Posted April 20, 2007 Report Share Posted April 20, 2007 ... I'm afraid it will all end like this:http://www.eurotrib.com/story/2007/1/20/164151/463 I blame tertiary education. These comments are pathetic. ... eeehm ... YES! They might be pathetic - but your answers were promises no proves so far ... in between: look at your graph published at 7:17 pm and your comments and we might start on values of primary education ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crofter Posted April 21, 2007 Report Share Posted April 21, 2007 Hey Greenheatman - I'd love to see you in action on "Dragons Den"! p.s. I understand your graphs, but until you verify the figures I reckon people will refuse to 'get it' and continue calling them silly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peeriebryan Posted April 21, 2007 Report Share Posted April 21, 2007 I've moved this thread to the science and technology section, as it's essentially a discussion about one invention and bears little relevance to 'Shetland News' Enjoy your new home Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenheatman Posted April 21, 2007 Report Share Posted April 21, 2007 Hey Greenheatman - I'd love to see you in action on "Dragons Den"! p.s. I understand your graphs, but until you verify the figures I reckon people will refuse to 'get it' and continue calling them silly. You will - quite soon! What's there to verify? The conventional minded idiots chose to take just about 7MWh(e) from a mechanical power resource of 88MWh between slack waters. I chose to extract almost all 88MWh and store it. That is a fairly simple idea to take on board surely? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonners Posted April 21, 2007 Report Share Posted April 21, 2007 crofter wrote:Hey Greenheatman - I'd love to see you in action on "Dragons Den"!p.s. I understand your graphs, but until you verify the figures I reckon people will refuse to 'get it' and continue calling them silly. You will - quite soon! So Greenheatman, I take it from this that you are going to be on Dragons Den. Are you able to prove this claim that you will be on Dragons Den or do you only have a graph that says you will be appearing? Don't think Duncan Bannatyne et al will be all that impressed unless you show up with a prototype. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenheatman Posted April 21, 2007 Report Share Posted April 21, 2007 So Greenheatman, I take it from this that you are going to be on Dragons Den. Are you able to prove this claim that you will be on Dragons Den or do you only have a graph that says you will be appearing? Don't think Duncan Bannatyne et al will be all that impressed unless you show up with a prototype. That would be Dragons' Den. I could make it a condition - that they could view the prototype in the sub-tropics before committing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sudden Stop Posted April 21, 2007 Report Share Posted April 21, 2007 What happened to our time-served engineer who has worked on gennies in the past? Is he lying in a darkened room now that he actually 'gets it'? Crikey, you leave the laptop for one night... Yes, i've looked at your graph, again. And it is, for want of a better word, silly. In fact, no. It's a misrepresentative piece of drivel. If that was presented to a maths teacher at school, it would come back with a big ole' F on it. You got your units all mixed up. The Y-axis is in KWs not MW and you've used that to show your favoured pieces of information, yet for the 'red dotted' line you've decided to use a different scale so as to make it look a lot less. Why? Because you are trying to confuse people so that you can come back and shout down any opposition. And your second graph doesn't seem to represent anything due to a lack of a meaningful key. All that you can take from the key that is there, is that from all the heat energy input to the system (from electrical immersion heaters btw) only two thirds is ever coming back out. As I've said before, your system is wasteful, overly complicated and more importantly - aint gonna happen here. You've refered to more than one of us as gulible, well we're not gulible enough to be taken in by you. The conventional minded idiots chose to take just about 7MWh(e) from a mechanical power resource of 88MWh between slack waters. I chose to extract almost all 88MWh and store it. You cannot create or destroy energy. So taking the electrical energy and putting it straight to work in the national grid WILL be more efficient than storing it as heat, losing 38% (your number not mine) in inefficiencies to then transmit to the grid at a later date. This system could be tested without the need for actual turbines in the water. Any electricity source can be used to run the immersion heaters. You can manually recreate the flow of electricity coming from the tidal turbine, turn it up for peak flow time and turn it down as the flow slackens etc etc. You can measure how much goes in and how much comes out the other end and I will guarentee to anybody reading this post that it WILL NOT be seven times greater. The output might be seven time less than the input but not one single joule will be created. No chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peeriebryan Posted April 21, 2007 Report Share Posted April 21, 2007 That would be Dragons' DenNow that's pedantic! I urge everyone to take this debate less personally and avoid any insults Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenheatman Posted April 21, 2007 Report Share Posted April 21, 2007 I have indeed used kW on my y-axis but it is quite easy to drop the last three zeros to convert this to MW. For example 10000kW=10MW, 20000kW=20MW and so on. No, I haven't altered the scale to make the competition look bad. The horizontal dotted line is set at 2000kW or to put it another way 2MW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.